Fact Check: Faulconer and Ballot Measures

Fact Check: Faulconer and Ballot Measures

Photo by Sam Hodgson

City Councilman Kevin Faulconer

Image: FalseStatement: “When it comes to ballot measures I’ve supported or campaigned against, I’ve always been with the majority of San Diego voters on Election Day,” Councilman Kevin Faulconer wrote in a Sept. 12 Voice of San Diego op-ed.

Determination: False

Analysis: Councilman Kevin Faulconer may be the mayoral candidate of choice for a group of heavyweight Republicans but he’s trying to play up his moderate credentials.

In a recent Voice of San Diego op-ed, Faulconer emphasized his ability to work with other leaders to build consensus and described himself as a socially moderate leader “mindful of the city’s bottom line.”

To further that message, Faulconer claimed San Diego voters sided with him on all the ballot measures he’s championed or campaigned against.

Local and statewide ballot measures have addressed all kinds of important policy issues in recent years – and Faulconer has opined on quite a few – so we decided it was worth checking this claim. Doing so could also shed some light on Faulconer’s positions on past propositions.

We focused on measures that made the ballot during Faulconer’s time on the City Council. He took office in January 2006 after a special election, which also means he’s currently San Diego’s longest-serving City Council member.

Faulconer’s campaign spokesman said the councilman was referring to city ballot measures when he made his claim. But Faulconer didn’t make that distinction in the op-ed, and he has also taken part in City Council votes urging city voters to support or oppose certain statewide measures – so we took those into account, along with his positions on citywide initiatives.

Here’s a review of nine city ballot measures Faulconer has weighed in on since January 2006:

Measure: Prop. C, which allowed the city to contract out services usually performed by city staffers if officials could prove outsourcing would result in savings and efficiencies

Faulconer’s role: He supported the 2006 managed competition measure and was listed as a supporter in the city’s voter information pamphlet. He continues to be an outspoken advocate for the process.

Election results: About 60 percent of voters supported it.

♦♦♦

Measure:  Prop. A, which clarified that the city couldn’t outsource public-safety jobs

Faulconer’s role: Faulconer was part of a joint campaign that supported this 2008 proposition and two others.

Election results: About 68 percent of voters supported it.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. B, which required the City Council to set a 2010 vote on whether to make the strong-mayor form of government permanent and add a ninth City Council District

Faulconer’s role: Faulconer was part of a joint campaign that supported this 2008 proposition and two others.

Election results:  About 77 percent of voters supported it.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. C, which established the responsibilities of the city’s chief financial officer, auditor, independent budget analyst, treasurer and audit committee

Faulconer’s role: Faulconer was part of a joint campaign that supported this 2008 proposition and two others.

Election results: About 63 percent of voters supported it.

 ♦♦♦

Measure:  Prop. C, which directed more revenue generated from leases at Mission Bay Park to improvements at the park and other city parks

Faulconer’s role: Faulconer and then-Councilwoman Donna Frye led the effort to get the measure on the ballot in 2008 and negotiated with other city leaders to ensure it would prevail.

Election results: About 67 percent of voters supported it.

♦♦♦

 Measure:  Prop. D, which made a one-year ban on alcohol at city beaches permanent

Faulconer’s role: Faulconer’s support was crucial. He pushed fellow City Council members to allow a public vote on the matter and then raised cash to support the 2008 measure.

Election results: About 53 percent of voters supported it.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. D, which made the strong-mayor form of government permanent, added a ninth City Council district and changed the rules on mayoral vetoes

Faulconer’s role: He was a vocal supporter of the strong-mayor system ahead of the 2010 vote.

Election results: About 60 percent of voters supported it.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. D, which aimed to add a temporary one-half cent sales tax to support city services including police, fire and street repairs

Faulconer’s role: Faulconer and then-Councilman Carl DeMaio campaigned against the tax hike.

Election results: About 62 percent of voters rejected the increase.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. B, which instituted 401(k) plans for new city staffers and attempted to freeze existing staffers’ pensionable pay, saving nearly $1 billion

Faulconer’s role: Faulconer worked closely with former Mayor Jerry Sanders to draft an initial version of the measure. The duo later teamed up with DeMaio and campaigned for the pension reform initiative.

Election results: About 66 percent of voters supported it.

 

As a councilman, Faulconer has also voted on several City Council resolutions to support or oppose statewide ballot propositions. We documented his votes on 15 such resolutions and checked canvass results to see whether his position matched the majority of voters on Election Day:

Measure: Prop. 1A, which barred the state from using transportation funds for other purposes

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted yes on a supportive City Council resolution.

Election results: State voters approved the 2006 measure and it had the backing of about 80 percent of city voters.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. 1B, which allowed the state to issue bonds to relieve traffic congestion on state and local roads, improve air quality, improve state transportation safety and more

Faulconer’s vote:  Faulconer voted yes on a supportive resolution.

Election results: State voters approved the 2006 measure and it had the backing of about 64 percent of San Diego voters.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. 1C, which allowed the state to sell bonds to provide low-income housing and assist with developments in urban areas

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted in favor of a supportive City Council resolution.

Election results:  State voters approved the 2006 measure and it had the backing of about 59 percent of city voters.

♦♦♦

 

Measure: Prop. 1D, which authorized more than $20 billion in spending on school buildings

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted in favor of a supportive City Council resolution.

Election results: State voters approved the 2006 measure and it had the backing of about 58 percent of city voters.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. 1E, which allowed the state to sell bonds to support more than $4 billion for flood management programs

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted in favor of a supportive City Council resolution.

Election results: State voters approved the 2006 measure and it had the backing of about 65 percent of city voters.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. 83, commonly referred to as Jessica’s Law, which increased penalties and broadened the definitions of certain sex offenses

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted in favor of a supportive City Council resolution.

Election results: State voters approved the 2006 measure and it had the backing of about 74 percent of city voters.

 ♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. 2, which barred farmers and others from confining animals in cages that prevented them from standing, extending their limbs or moving freely

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted in favor of a supportive City Council resolution.

Election results: State voters approved the 2008 measure and it had the backing of about 69 percent of city voters.

 ♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. 8, which banned same-sex marriage (The measure has since been struck down.)

Faulconer’s vote:  Faulconer voted in favor of a City Council resolution opposing the measure.

Election results: State voters approved the 2008 measure but only about 46 percent of San Diego voters supported it.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. 19, which aimed to legalize marijuana

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted in favor of a City Council resolution opposing the measure.

Election results: State voters rejected the 2010 measure but about 52 percent of city voters supported it.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. 21, which attempted to increase state vehicle license fees to raise about $500 million a year for state parks

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted against a supportive City Council resolution.

Election results: State voters rejected the 2010 measure, as did about 56 percent of city voters.

♦♦♦

Measure: Prop. 23, which aimed to suspend a state law mandating greenhouse gas reductions

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted in favor of a City Council resolution opposing the measure.

Election results: State voters rejected the 2010 measure and about 63 percent of city voters also opposed it.

♦♦♦

Measure:  Prop. 24, which attempted to repeal certain business tax breaks

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted in favor of a City Council resolution opposing the measure.

Election results: State voters rejected the 2010 measure, as did about 57 percent of city voters

♦♦♦

Measure:  Prop. 25, which allows state legislators to approve state budgets with a simple majority rather than a two-thirds vote

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted against a supportive City Council resolution.

Election results: State voters approved the 2010 measure, as did about 53 percent of city voters.

♦♦♦

Measure:  Prop. 26, which calls for a two-thirds vote by state legislatures to pass certain taxes and charges

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted against a City Council measure opposing Prop. 26.

Election results: State voters approved the 2010 measure, as did about 53 percent of city voters.

♦♦♦

Measure:  Prop. 27, which aimed to repeal the state law that created the California Citizens Redistricting Commission

Faulconer’s vote: Faulconer voted in favor of a City Council resolution opposing the measure.

Election results: State voters rejected the 2010 measure, as did about 60 percent of San Diego voters.

♦♦♦

So let’s revisit Faulconer’s claim. The councilman said a majority of voters echoed his positions on ballot measures he’s openly supported or campaigned against in recent years.

Again, Faulconer’s spokesman said the councilman was focused on city measures, and his positions on those measures did match those of voters on local measures he’s publicly backed or opposed.

But Faulconer also weighed in on statewide ballot measures as a councilman and on two occasions, his positions differed from that of city voters.

In 2010, Faulconer and fellow City Council members voted on a resolution opposing the legalization of marijuana. Though the measure failed statewide, about 52 percent of city voters supported it.

The same year, Faulconer also voted against a City Council resolution supporting Prop. 25, a measure touted by Democrats that allowed state legislators to pass a budget without a two-thirds majority. About 53 percent of city voters supported that change.

These exceptions are notable because Faulconer didn’t specifically refer to city initiatives in his op-ed.

Faulconer actually claimed he’s “always been with the majority of voters on Election Day,” and that’s false.

If you disagree with our determination or analysis, please express your thoughts in the comments section of this blog post. Explain your reasoning.

Voice of San Diego is a nonprofit that depends on you, our readers. Please donate to keep the service strong. Click here to find out more about our supporters and how we operate independently.


Lisa Halverstadt

Lisa Halverstadt

Lisa Halverstadt is a reporter at Voice of San Diego. Know of something she should check out? You can contact her directly at lisa@vosd.org or 619.325.0528.

  • 369 Posts
  • 11
    Followers

Show comments
Before you comment, read these simple guidelines on what is not allowed.

72 comments
Don Blucher
Don Blucher

Fact Check has a valid place in VoSD's reporting. However, it would be far more credible if VoSD WAS TRUTHFUL about THEIR bias towards conservative candidates. I don't like the fact that VoSD reporters regularly participate in progressive-tainted reporting on KPBS and other networks, then come out and mislead their readers about positions they're opposed to in print form. Lisa, your investigation showed that Mr. Faulconer has, indeed, voted along with a majority of city voters on most of the issues you reported on. Please have enough INTEGRITY as a journalist to say so. To call his claims false is a horrible distortion of the truth. If you, as a VoSD employee or private citizen, prefer Aguirre, Alvarez, or Fletcher, please have enough honesty to say so. That is your prerogative.You and your organization would garner far more respect for truthful and unbiased reporting than the deceitful spin you are trying to pass off as objective. VoSD has the chance to be a significant outlet for local news.....Don't squander the opportunity.

Don Blucher
Don Blucher subscriber

Fact Check has a valid place in VoSD's reporting. However, it would be far more credible if VoSD WAS TRUTHFUL about THEIR bias towards conservative candidates. I don't like the fact that VoSD reporters regularly participate in progressive-tainted reporting on KPBS and other networks, then come out and mislead their readers about positions they're opposed to in print form. Lisa, your investigation showed that Mr. Faulconer has, indeed, voted along with a majority of city voters on most of the issues you reported on. Please have enough INTEGRITY as a journalist to say so. To call his claims false is a horrible distortion of the truth. If you, as a VoSD employee or private citizen, prefer Aguirre, Alvarez, or Fletcher, please have enough honesty to say so. That is your prerogative.You and your organization would garner far more respect for truthful and unbiased reporting than the deceitful spin you are trying to pass off as objective. VoSD has the chance to be a significant outlet for local news.....Don't squander the opportunity.

Jerry Hall
Jerry Hall

I wanted to offer a contrasting rating for a recent fact check that also involves Councilmember Faulconer. In that fact check you looked at a comment made by a resident speaking on his own behalf, on an issue where Kevin was involved - which you mentioned as justification for the check because of Kevin's candidacy: ( http://voiceofsandiego.org/2013/09/06/fact-check-businesses-and-the-booze-ban/ where the resident claimed: “Beach businesses have suffered dramatically, their revenues are down almost 50 percent since the (alcohol) ban,”). Although neither the person making the statement nor any of the others you interviewed offered any evidence other than anecdotal, you endorsed this statement as "Misleading" presumably because your criteria for that rating is that there is 'an element of truth' albeit badly distorted. My argument is that that rating should have been False or Huckster Propaganda even. I thought I had presented significant evidence that this is a conflicted rating but, it has not changed. In this current fact check, the average San Diego vote-total averaged 64% over the nine propositions measured. That means over his San Diego political career Kevin voted along with nearly two-thirds (two points under a super-majority) of San Diegans - without fail. What any of our councilmembers decided to send Sacramento in favor or opposition of their proposals were in fact advisory resolutions. Yet, Kevin was very much in step with San Diego's voters. Your fact check rating criteria are here: http://voiceofsandiego.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ratingsdefinedwith.jpg and the rating you gave on Kevin's statement is False? Your criteria reads "The statement is not accurate. This could be an error or misstatement but it's simply not true and there is no element of truth to it." Your earlier rating to the first fact check mentioned was significantly more generous - especially because it was not based on facts but, conjecture. In contrast the rating of True "The statement is accurate and there is nothing major to qualify it" or, Mostly True "the statement is accurate but, there is an important nuance to consider." would be vastly more appropriate for this rating regarding Kevin's highly accurate statement - and in fact, 'mostly true' would be inaccurate if you decide to back off from including the state resolution element. I truly haven't decided which candidate to vote for because I want to weigh the facts apples-to-apples and don't vote straight-party tickets (GOP) any longer - declaring independent a few years ago. That being said I'm actually really impressed with Kevin's voting record - even though I don't agree with all of them the fact is he seems to have his finger on most San Diegan's pulse when it comes to local, and state for that matter, propositions. [This is a statement to the larger VOSD community]: Call me naive but, if this isn't a painfully clear attack on Kevin's credibility and reputation I don't know what is. I have joined and contributed to VOSD because I have believed it has been a much-needed addition, alternative even, to the UT. My belief is that it wouldn't be nearly as biased or connected to and external power structure we're long accustomed to, and over time that has proven true. Several times though I've done a double-take in what I have perceived as contradictions in its stated intentions vs. what I was reading or experiencing but, I brushed them off as my perhaps being too sensitive. Recently, seeing the use of the 'fact' check tool as what seems to be a political tool is disappointing. I understand for-profit major media such as the UT pointing their media-guns in a direction because that's what owner paid to have the ability to do, as have newspapermen for centuries. However, I think it's a fine line to be dancing on when a public-benefit media organizations uses a similar tool to seemingly advocate in a political contest - directly or indirectly. I'm not accusing us of this because, again perhaps I'm wrong but, my intuitive alarm bells are ringing. Is this the direction we are all supporting? I really love this organization and hope some controls can be put in place to avoid any appearance of a potential conflict of interest. This piece seems to illustrate the need for such controls. Fact Check: Businesses and the Booze Banhttp://voiceofsandiego.org/2013/09/06/fact-check-businesses-and-the-booze-ban/Statement: "Beach businesses have suffered dramatically, their revenues are down almost 50 percent since the (alcohol) ban," Pacific Beach resident Paul Falcone said in an Aug. 29 SDNews.com story. Determination: Misleading Analysis: Almost five year...

Janet Shelton
Janet Shelton

I wish VOSD would discontinue the fact check. While the fact checks do bring forward some information, the results are usually not meaningful or enlightening.

Janet Shelton
Janet Shelton subscriber

I wish VOSD would discontinue the fact check. While the fact checks do bring forward some information, the results are usually not meaningful or enlightening.

Kenneth Orr
Kenneth Orr

Kevin Faulconer is my councilperson, and I really hope he isn't elected Mayor, because his office doesn't even respond to complaints or feedback from his constituents in the East Village now. Do we really want him ignoring the entire city? I will be voting NO!

Omar Passons
Omar Passons

I think Chris Brewster's point is actually the more interesting aspect of the story. And while I generally enjoy the fact checks my sense of the data looked like "mostly true" was more accurate. Honestly, I don't care if Faulconer or Fletcher or Alvarez is usually with the voters. I care that they clearly articulate a position based on some set of principles that I can identify and then back up their positions with actions in support of that principle. And if they--any of them--claim to hold a certain view and change their mind, great. Just justify it with something concrete. I think Faulconer did that with his change on the alcohol ban (mass violence) and think Fletcher did that as to leaving the GOP (doesn't believe important parts of that party line). There are incredibly important local issues to be pushing Fletcher, Faulconer and Alvarez on and I'd just as soon stay keyed into those.

Omar Passons
Omar Passons subscribermember

I think Chris Brewster's point is actually the more interesting aspect of the story. And while I generally enjoy the fact checks my sense of the data looked like "mostly true" was more accurate. Honestly, I don't care if Faulconer or Fletcher or Alvarez is usually with the voters. I care that they clearly articulate a position based on some set of principles that I can identify and then back up their positions with actions in support of that principle. And if they--any of them--claim to hold a certain view and change their mind, great. Just justify it with something concrete. I think Faulconer did that with his change on the alcohol ban (mass violence) and think Fletcher did that as to leaving the GOP (doesn't believe important parts of that party line). There are incredibly important local issues to be pushing Fletcher, Faulconer and Alvarez on and I'd just as soon stay keyed into those.

Craig Leedham
Craig Leedham

It seems reasonable to use a higher standard for a fact check when the statement in question comes from Faulconer's own pen. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt that "always" shouldn't be literally applied here except that he made the statement (and likely re-read and proofed many times it before he did so) in his very own op-ed piece. A spirited self-defense of his record is one thing, but using VOSD or any other outlet that prints his words to make claims that he leans with the majority of SD voters is another. This is especially the case when one is running for office....

Leedham
Leedham

It seems reasonable to use a higher standard for a fact check when the statement in question comes from Faulconer's own pen. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt that "always" shouldn't be literally applied here except that he made the statement (and likely re-read and proofed it before he did so) in his very own op-ed piece. A spirited self-defense of his record is one thing, but using VOSD or any other outlet that prints his words to make claims that he leans with the majority of SD voters is another.

Brian Peterson
Brian Peterson

I am not for Fletcher/Faulconer either, but in his op-ed Kevin clearly inferred he was talking about local propositions. Maybe the VOSD thinks Kevin is writing based on Hemingway’s iceberg theory: “Write on the principle of the iceberg. There is seven-eighths of it underwater for every part that shows.” But, I don’t think Kevin was an English major. Besides, if one’s position on these local ballot measures is the litmus test, shouldn’t DeMaio be Mayor?

Brian Peterson
Brian Peterson subscriber

I am not for Fletcher/Faulconer either, but in his op-ed Kevin clearly inferred he was talking about local propositions. Maybe the VOSD thinks Kevin is writing based on Hemingway’s iceberg theory: “Write on the principle of the iceberg. There is seven-eighths of it underwater for every part that shows.” But, I don’t think Kevin was an English major. Besides, if one’s position on these local ballot measures is the litmus test, shouldn’t DeMaio be Mayor?

Julie Wright
Julie Wright

Without respect to whether the ballot measures were local or not, whatever happened to the more accurate description "Mostly True"??

Julie Wright
Julie Wright subscribermember

Without respect to whether the ballot measures were local or not, whatever happened to the more accurate description "Mostly True"??

David Cohen
David Cohen

I don't expect to vote for Faulconer, but I find this so-called Fact Check to be petty, pedantic, and misleading. If the VOSD is taken seriously by politicians, they should all learn never to claim "always" or "never" or to use a specific number, and then the overly-literal FC pieces would disappear.

David Cohen
David Cohen subscriber

I don't expect to vote for Faulconer, but I find this so-called Fact Check to be petty, pedantic, and misleading. If the VOSD is taken seriously by politicians, they should all learn never to claim "always" or "never" or to use a specific number, and then the overly-literal FC pieces would disappear.

Rick Dieterle
Rick Dieterle

Sheesh.. you guys are at it again. It certainly looks like Faulconer has a good handle on what San Diegan want. There were a handful of times when his vote didn't match up... big deal. He's got a better record of supporting what we want than most politicians do. It must be a slow news day.

Rick Dieterle
Rick Dieterle subscriber

Sheesh.. you guys are at it again. It certainly looks like Faulconer has a good handle on what San Diegan want. There were a handful of times when his vote didn't match up... big deal. He's got a better record of supporting what we want than most politicians do. It must be a slow news day.

Patrick Flynn
Patrick Flynn

I'm not a Kevin Faulconer fan, but I don't think this Fact Check is fair to him. You had to go pretty deep to find 2 occasions, out of 24 examples, where his position was different than the voters, and on those occasions the margin was very slim. In my mind, his claim is at least mostly true, and if you accept his clarification about referring to local issues, then his claim seems to be true. I don't think he should necessarily be proud of his claim because one could argue that he is a follower and not a leader, but I don't agree that his claim is false. This article is incorrectly labeled as a "Fact Check" and should be re-categorized as an editorial.

Patrick Flynn
Patrick Flynn subscriber

I'm not a Kevin Faulconer fan, but I don't think this Fact Check is fair to him. You had to go pretty deep to find 2 occasions, out of 24 examples, where his position was different than the voters, and on those occasions the margin was very slim. In my mind, his claim is at least mostly true, and if you accept his clarification about referring to local issues, then his claim seems to be true. I don't think he should necessarily be proud of his claim because one could argue that he is a follower and not a leader, but I don't agree that his claim is false. This article is incorrectly labeled as a "Fact Check" and should be re-categorized as an editorial.

David Hall
David Hall

He left out the word "local" in referring to ballot measures and therefore the fact check is accurate. Pretty straightforward. If you believe, as many do, that he usually decides what the majority wants before taking a position, his statement isn't exactly something to be proud of.

David Hall
David Hall subscriber

He left out the word "local" in referring to ballot measures and therefore the fact check is accurate. Pretty straightforward. If you believe, as many do, that he usually decides what the majority wants before taking a position, his statement isn't exactly something to be proud of.

Chris Brewster
Chris Brewster

Is it important to a leader to always be part of the herd? Is that leadership?

Chris Brewster
Chris Brewster subscribermember

Is it important to a leader to always be part of the herd? Is that leadership?

Benjamin Katz
Benjamin Katz

I couldn't care less if this fact check it true or false. But I do find Faulconer's history with these charter amendments extremely interesting. Eight times Faulconer has pushed to amend the charter, and he has left us with a total mess. What Professor James Ingram described as "one of the worst city charters in the country." The charter contradicts itself, conflicts with state law, lacks clarity, and fails to contain critical provisions such as how to handle a Mayor who is unable to perform his/her duties. If this is Faulconer's so called leadership, we don't need any more of it.

Benjamin Katz
Benjamin Katz subscribermember

I couldn't care less if this fact check it true or false. But I do find Faulconer's history with these charter amendments extremely interesting. Eight times Faulconer has pushed to amend the charter, and he has left us with a total mess. What Professor James Ingram described as "one of the worst city charters in the country." The charter contradicts itself, conflicts with state law, lacks clarity, and fails to contain critical provisions such as how to handle a Mayor who is unable to perform his/her duties. If this is Faulconer's so called leadership, we don't need any more of it.

Tony Manolatos
Tony Manolatos

Lisa initially had a clear understanding of Kevin's op-ed and what he was saying. In an email to me last week she said: "I’ve got good news on a Friday afternoon. I decided Kevin’s claim about his record on city ballot measures was true." Lisa obviously recognized Kevin was referring to city ballot measures. Flash forward to tonight on Voice's FB page: "Kevin Faulconer's been playing up his moderate street cred, claiming San Diego voters have sided with him on all the ballot measures he's backed or opposed. We're calling that a big fatty False in our latest Fact Check." Moving forward I hope Voice does the right thing. When editorializing what it presents as fact/news, it should note that Irwin Jacobs is one of Voice's largest donors. Mr. Jacobs employs Nathan Fletcher and is a key financial backer of his in this race.

Tony Manolatos
Tony Manolatos subscriber

Lisa initially had a clear understanding of Kevin's op-ed and what he was saying. In an email to me last week she said: "I’ve got good news on a Friday afternoon. I decided Kevin’s claim about his record on city ballot measures was true." Lisa obviously recognized Kevin was referring to city ballot measures. Flash forward to tonight on Voice's FB page: "Kevin Faulconer's been playing up his moderate street cred, claiming San Diego voters have sided with him on all the ballot measures he's backed or opposed. We're calling that a big fatty False in our latest Fact Check." Moving forward I hope Voice does the right thing. When editorializing what it presents as fact/news, it should note that Irwin Jacobs is one of Voice's largest donors. Mr. Jacobs employs Nathan Fletcher and is a key financial backer of his in this race.

Tony Krvaric
Tony Krvaric

Umm, yeah. I'm gonna make an exception to posting here to call this "fact check" out. Obviously Kevin meant local ballot measures where he actively took part in passing or opposing a measure - not resolutions on statewide measures. Is this fact check a joke? Gimme a break. Embarrassingly poor reporting. Just when I had started to regain a modicum of respect for VOSD. I guess I was wrong...

Tony Krvaric
Tony Krvaric subscriber

Umm, yeah. I'm gonna make an exception to posting here to call this "fact check" out. Obviously Kevin meant local ballot measures where he actively took part in passing or opposing a measure - not resolutions on statewide measures. Is this fact check a joke? Gimme a break. Embarrassingly poor reporting. Just when I had started to regain a modicum of respect for VOSD. I guess I was wrong...

Jim Jones
Jim Jones

Had to cherrypick pretty far to find a false for Faulconer, didn't you? So if Fletcher doesn't make it through to a run off, who is VOSD going to support as Jacobs second choice?

Jim Jones
Jim Jones subscriber

Had to cherrypick pretty far to find a false for Faulconer, didn't you? So if Fletcher doesn't make it through to a run off, who is VOSD going to support as Jacobs second choice?

David Cohen
David Cohen

I agree. Several times I have commented or sent emails arguing that particular FC articles were misleading and/or trivial and/or grossly mis-rated.

Jim Jones
Jim Jones

I disagree, while "Fact Check" may not reveal much about the actual subject, it is extremely enlightening about VOSD's biases and their activism or paid opining veiled as reporting.

David Cohen
David Cohen subscriber

I agree. Several times I have commented or sent emails arguing that particular FC articles were misleading and/or trivial and/or grossly mis-rated.

Jim Jones
Jim Jones subscriber

I disagree, while "Fact Check" may not reveal much about the actual subject, it is extremely enlightening about VOSD's biases and their activism or paid opining veiled as reporting.

Patrick Flynn
Patrick Flynn

I agree that there are important issues pushing the major candidates, and that those issues are more interesting and important than if a candidate is "with the voters". The issue about this "Fact Check" seems like a sideshow distraction, but I think it is actually much more important than that. The only practical way to follow a candidate is through media reporting; I don't have time to obtain and sort through the raw data myself. Some local media outlets have lost their credibility in recent years. When VOSD prints a "Fact Check" like this one, it casts doubt on their credibility as a media outlet, and I think you are seeing that doubt manifested in the comments from readers. The credibility of our local media outlets is an important issue and I don't think it befits VOSD to try to sweep it under the rug.

Patrick Flynn
Patrick Flynn subscriber

I agree that there are important issues pushing the major candidates, and that those issues are more interesting and important than if a candidate is "with the voters". The issue about this "Fact Check" seems like a sideshow distraction, but I think it is actually much more important than that. The only practical way to follow a candidate is through media reporting; I don't have time to obtain and sort through the raw data myself. Some local media outlets have lost their credibility in recent years. When VOSD prints a "Fact Check" like this one, it casts doubt on their credibility as a media outlet, and I think you are seeing that doubt manifested in the comments from readers. The credibility of our local media outlets is an important issue and I don't think it befits VOSD to try to sweep it under the rug.

Judith Swink
Judith Swink

"Just yell squirrel next time." .... and then vote for Bruce Coons. See his qualifications at his campaign website and prepare to be surprised about his extensive business management & entrepreneurial skills, acquired long before Save Our Heritage Organisation had the foresight to hire him as Executive Director. BruceCoonsforMayor.com/biography.htm

Ryan Clumpner
Ryan Clumpner

Look over there! Nathan Fletcher spent eight years in the State Assembly and never straightened out that train wreck of a state constitution. Just yell squirrel next time.

Judith Swink
Judith Swink subscriber

"Just yell squirrel next time." .... and then vote for Bruce Coons. See his qualifications at his campaign website and prepare to be surprised about his extensive business management & entrepreneurial skills, acquired long before Save Our Heritage Organisation had the foresight to hire him as Executive Director. BruceCoonsforMayor.com/biography.htm

Ryan Clumpner
Ryan Clumpner subscriber

Look over there! Nathan Fletcher spent eight years in the State Assembly and never straightened out that train wreck of a state constitution. Just yell squirrel next time.

Dale Hill
Dale Hill

I just renewed my membership a few weeks ago, and this comment about your editor asking for the change makes me want to take it back. I had considered your reporting generally fair prior to this. His statement implies reference to San Diego measures only by saying he was siding with San Diego voters even if it does not clearly state it. Also, if I were voting on a council resolution, I would certainly not consider that campaigning against a measure. As a board member, I have voted on many items that I did not have a strong feeling about. I certainly would not have tried to convince someone else to vote that way. A false rating was way out of line. I do not know who I will vote for at this point, but this piece makes me look at Kevin more favorably than I did before.

Lisa Halverstadt
Lisa Halverstadt

Thanks for weighing in, Tony. After that Friday email, my editor read my post and made a very valid point that the average voter might also think about statewide ballot propositions after reading Faulconer's statement. I reconsidered my initial ruling and began researching Faulconer's publicized positions on state ballot issues. In the end, I decided Faulconer's statement was false because he didn't simply focus on city issues. In fact, he claimed voters have always sided with him on Election Day. That's just not true. And furthermore, just to clarify, Irwin Jacobs is indeed a major donor to Voice of San Diego but our donors' views don't drive our reporting. In the year I've been at VOSD, I've never once been encouraged to change a Fact Check ruling or present a story differently based on a donors' views. In fact, sometimes our donors disagree with our rulings and voice their opinions in the comment sections or elsewhere. We welcome that.

Dale Hill
Dale Hill subscribermember

I just renewed my membership a few weeks ago, and this comment about your editor asking for the change makes me want to take it back. I had considered your reporting generally fair prior to this. His statement implies reference to San Diego measures only by saying he was siding with San Diego voters even if it does not clearly state it. Also, if I were voting on a council resolution, I would certainly not consider that campaigning against a measure. As a board member, I have voted on many items that I did not have a strong feeling about. I certainly would not have tried to convince someone else to vote that way. A false rating was way out of line. I do not know who I will vote for at this point, but this piece makes me look at Kevin more favorably than I did before.

Lisa Halverstadt
Lisa Halverstadt author

Thanks for weighing in, Tony. After that Friday email, my editor read my post and made a very valid point that the average voter might also think about statewide ballot propositions after reading Faulconer's statement. I reconsidered my initial ruling and began researching Faulconer's publicized positions on state ballot issues. In the end, I decided Faulconer's statement was false because he didn't simply focus on city issues. In fact, he claimed voters have always sided with him on Election Day. That's just not true. And furthermore, just to clarify, Irwin Jacobs is indeed a major donor to Voice of San Diego but our donors' views don't drive our reporting. In the year I've been at VOSD, I've never once been encouraged to change a Fact Check ruling or present a story differently based on a donors' views. In fact, sometimes our donors disagree with our rulings and voice their opinions in the comment sections or elsewhere. We welcome that.

Tyler Brand
Tyler Brand

The leader of the San Diego GOP not liking this Fact Check? Shocker. The fact is Mr. Faulconer didn't support certain issues that the majority of San Diego voters supported. Many of those state-wide issues are just as important to city voters as the city measures. Downplaying this is amusing.

Tyler Brand
Tyler Brand subscriber

The leader of the San Diego GOP not liking this Fact Check? Shocker. The fact is Mr. Faulconer didn't support certain issues that the majority of San Diego voters supported. Many of those state-wide issues are just as important to city voters as the city measures. Downplaying this is amusing.

Don Blucher
Don Blucher

That still doesn't change the fact that your "Fact Check" False is materially FALSE in a majority of reader's opinions, Lisa.

Don Blucher
Don Blucher subscriber

That still doesn't change the fact that your "Fact Check" False is materially FALSE in a majority of reader's opinions, Lisa.